Yes, there are two Americas’ Virginia, they exist as certainly as love and generosity and devotion exist. One tolerant and broadminded, the other intolerant and narrow-minded!
Sincerely, thinkingblue, from the TOLERANT AND BROADMINDED USA
PS: Joe (You Lie) Wilson, et al reside in the other America!

Thursday, June 24, 2010

When Roberts and his merry band of judges, were deciding the fate of America in the Citizens United v. FEC case,

Citizens United v Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S.50 (2010), was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court holding that corporate funding of independent political broadcasts in candidate elections cannot be limited under the First Amendment. The 5–4 decision resulted from a dispute over whether the non-profit corporation Citizens United could air via video on demand a critical film about Hillary Clinton, and whether the group could advertise the film in broadcast ads featuring Clinton's image, in apparent violation of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, commonly known as the McCain–Feingold Act.

I felt as though it would never come to pass; Corporations to be treated as though they were people, how could this be? Every media outlet that I had viewed said it was very likely to be a 5 to 4 decision in favor of Corporations. NO WAY! I still refused to believe that the 5 accomplished Supreme Court judges could ever vote against The People even with bearing in mind, that they were of the "Conservative Persuasion".

(In my opinion, a system of beliefs, that advocate, Flesh and Blood People insignificant when making laws).

Live and learn, that’s what happened to me on January 21, 2010 because it DID COME TO PASS and now we are dangerously close to an election that could be decided by Corporations, even ones overseas like BP.

Today, after receiving this email, I thought I would try to do a small part in undoing such an ignorant law, by blogging it around. My efforts will have seemed worth it even if only one person takes action to tell these 5 Roberts' judges that they were in the wrong and "We The People" must make it right by forcing a constitutional amendment. Please read more about it HERE. And while you’re at it visit MOVE TO AMEND.

An important new poll commissioned by People For the American Way shows that Americans of every political stripe resoundingly reject the Roberts Court's dangerous decision in Citizens United v. FEC, which opened the floodgates of unlimited corporate cash in our elections.

We should have a government of, by and for the people. The polling results show increasing concern among Americans that, in part because of the Court's decision, which equates corporations with people, we are becoming a government of, by and for the corporations. The poll also shows broad awareness that when corporations spend unlimited amounts to influence the outcome of elections, it infringes on the rights of the rest of us by drowning out the voices of the average citizen.

The Court's decision in Citizens Unitedwas so disastrous that voters overwhelmingly support a constitutional amendment to correct it.

Three-quarters of voters said that they support a constitutionalamendment to limit the amount that corporations can spend inelections. A similar majority are more inclined to support acandidate who has spoken out in favor of an amendment. Thissupport cuts across party and ideology, with majorities ofDemocrats, Republicans and Independents in support of the measure.

Leading up to Election Day, People For the American Way, alongwith Public Citizen and other allies, will be askingcongressional candidates to pledge to support a constitutionalamendment, and sharing that information with voters.

Here are some of the polling specifics:

85% of voters say thatcorporations have too much influence over the politicalsystem today while 93% say that average citizens have toolittle influence.

95% agree that "Corporationsspend money on politics mainly to buy influence ingovernment and elect people who are favorable to theirfinancial interests." (74% stronglyagree)

85% disagree that"Corporations should be able to spend as much asthey want to influence the outcome of elections becausethe Constitution protects freedom ofspeech." (63% strongly disagree)

93% agree that "There shouldbe clear limits on how much money corporations can spendto influence the outcome of an election." (74% stronglyagree)

77% think Congress should supportan amendment to limit the amount U.S. corporations canspend to influence elections.

74% say that they would be morelikely to vote for a candidate for Congress who pledgedto support a constitutional amendment limiting corporatespending in elections.

Please sign this very importantpetition "demand question time" (of our political leaders) HERE...We really need more dialog from those at the top... TheRepublicans have got to be made to realize they can't hide behind"NO" any longer! thinkingblue

About Me

Yes, there are two Americas’ Virginia, they exist as certainly as love and generosity and devotion exist. One tolerant and
free-thinking, the other intolerant and close-minded!
Sincerely, thinkingblue, from the TOLERANT AND FREE-THINKING USA
PS: Joe (You Lie) Wilson, Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh et al reside in the intolerant America!